skip to main content
10.1145/3629606.3629670acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschinese-chiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Designing Tangible Lighting for Children to Enhance Visiting Experiences during Museum Touring

Published:27 February 2024Publication History

ABSTRACT

Tangible interaction in museums for children's education has always been an important area of interest. However, several museums are subject to local constraints which make the interactive experience of the visit unattractive. Through this research we have designed LURN, a journey-accompanying toy lamp for children aimed at enhancing the experience of visiting in Yangming Former Residence. Through prototyping, LURN was designed and evaluated at an exhibition to verify the possibility of interaction.

References

  1. Caroline Claisse, Daniela Petrelli, Luigina Ciolfi, Nick Dulake, Mark T. Marshall, and Abigail C. Durrant. 2020. Crafting Critical Heritage Discourses into Interactive Exhibition Design. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376689Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Duranti Daniele, Spallazzo, Davide and Trocchianesi Raffaella, R. 2016. Tangible Interaction in Museums and Temporary Exhibitions: Embedding and Embodying the Intangible Values of Cultural Heritage. In 6th International Forum of Design as a Process Systems & Design: Beyond Processes and Thinking, 160-171. https://doi.org/10.4995/IFDP.2016.3322Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Elisabeth M.A.G. van Dijk, Andreas Lingnau, and Hub Kockelkorn. 2012. Measuring enjoyment of an interactive museum experience. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM international conference on Multimodal interaction (ICMI '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 249–256. https://doi.org/10.1145/2388676s.2388728Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Eslam Nofal, Georgia Panagiotidou, Rabee M. Reffat, Hendrik Hameeuw, Vanessa Boschloos, and Andrew Vande Moere. 2020. Situated Tangible Gamification of Heritage for Supporting Collaborative Learning of Young Museum Visitors. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 13, 1, Article 3 (February 2020), 24 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3350427Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Halim Acosta, Nathan Henderson, Jonathan Rowe, Wookhee Min, James Minogue, and James Lester. 2021. What's Fair is Fair: Detecting and Mitigating Encoded Bias in Multimodal Models of Museum Visitor Attention. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction (ICMI '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 258–267. https://doi.org/10.1145/3462244.3479943Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Jinguo Liu, Xin Zhang, Ketao Zhang, Jian S Dai, Shujun Li, and Qi Sun. 2018. Configuration analysis of a reconfigurable Rubik. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 233, 3137-3154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954406218805112Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Joyce Ma, Lisa Sindorf, Isaac Liao, and Jennifer Frazier. 2015. Using a Tangible Versus a Multi-touch Graphical User Interface to Support Data Exploration at a Museum Exhibit. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/2677199.2680555Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Kanghun Ahn. 2020. Two Neo-Confucian Models of Educating Children: A Comparison between Zhu Xi and Wang Yangming's Pedagogical Thought. Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture 34, 11-42. https://doi.org/10.22916/jcpc.2020. 34.11Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Wafa Almukadi and Guy A. Boy. 2016. Enhancing Collaboration and Facilitating Children's Learning Using TUIs: A Human-Centered Design Approach. In Learning and Collaboration Technologies: Third International Conference, LCT 2016, Held as Part of HCI International 2016, Toronto, ON, Canada, July 17-22, 2016, Proceedings. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39483-1_10Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Michael S. Horn, Erin Treacy Solovey, R. Jordan Crouser, and Robert J.K. Jacob. 2009. Comparing the use of tangible and graphical programming languages for informal science education. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 975–984. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518851Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Min Jeong Kang, Ming Hsu, Ian M. Krajbich, George Loewenstein, Samuel M. McClure, Joseph Tao-yi Wang, and Colin F. Camerer. 2009. The Wick in the Candle of Learning. Psychological Science 20, 963-973. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02402.xGriffin, J. (2004). Research on students and museums: Looking more closely at the students in school groups. Science education, 88(S1), S59-S70Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Mark T. Marshall, Nick Dulake, Luigina Ciolfi, Daniele Duranti, Hub Kockelkorn, and Daniela Petrelli. 2016. Using Tangible Smart Replicas as Controls for an Interactive Museum Exhibition. In Proceedings of the TEI '16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839462.2839493Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Roberta Della Croce, Luisa Puddu, and Andrea Smorti. 2019. A qualitative exploratory study on museum educators’ perspective on children's guided museum visits. Museum Management and Curatorship 34, 383-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/09647775.2019.1630849Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Schou, Mette Muxoll, and Anders Sundnes Løvlie. 2021. The Diary of Niels: Affective Engagement through Tangible Interaction with Museum Artifacts. In Euro-Mediterranean Conference, Springer, Cham, 289-299. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73043-7_24Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. William Day. 2012. Zhenzhi and Acknowledgment in Wang Yangming and Stanley Cavell. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 39, 174-191. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6253.2012.01712.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Designing Tangible Lighting for Children to Enhance Visiting Experiences during Museum Touring

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      CHCHI '23: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Symposium of Chinese CHI
      November 2023
      634 pages
      ISBN:9798400716454
      DOI:10.1145/3629606

      Copyright © 2023 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 27 February 2024

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate17of40submissions,43%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)23
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format